Resistance is futile: NPR must be funded so we can ‘assimilate people’

Dan Calabrese

I sort of like having David Brooks around. He serves as a living demonstration of a lot of troubling things. By the standards of the New York Times and much of official Washington, Brooks is supposed to be some sort of conservative. And that probably tells you everything you need to know about officialdom.

So when MSNBC’s Chris Matthews asked Brooks the other day to make his case for why we should continue to give federal funding to public broadcasting, what could the elitist Mr. Brooks say? He couldn’t say there aren’t enough other choices, since there are thousands of them. He couldn’t defend NPR and PBS against the elitist charge, although, as an elitist himself, he probably has a hard time seeing the problem with that.

So he said this:

“Here’s the case: You know we have a common culture. If we’re going to assimilate people, if we’re going to be one nation – it helps to have a common culture. There’s some things that do join us. And government has some role in help creating those things, in funding the things that join us. The Smithsonian museums do some of that. I think public broadcasting with shows like ‘The American Experience,’ they give us all something to clue into our history. They join us as a people. They assimilate immigrants and it’s worth a very small amount, and you should see my paychecks – a very small amount that we pay to this.”

Got that? It doesn’t matter that you can get upwards of 1,000 different channels on cable or satellite, or that you can get hundreds of radio stations on XM/Siruis – not to mention your local broadcast stations. Apparently those hundreds and hundreds of offerings don’t effectively “assimilate” you into the “common culture” of America, as defined and approved by snobs like David Brooks.

To really get a sense of where he’s coming from, you need to read more David Brooks, but since you would rather scratch a chalkboard, I’ll sum it up for you. Brooks believes the major division in society today is not rich vs. poor, nor is it liberal vs. conservative, but rather the educated vs. the uneducated. Guess which group David Brooks likes!

So you, the great unwashed, watching wrestling, Dog the Bounty Hunter, Operation Repo or the very worst thing of all, Fox News Channel, David Brooks has a problem with you. See, we have a “common culture,” and it consists of things David Brooks approves of. Stuff you find in the Smithsonian. Stuff you hear at the opera. Not that gauche fair that you like!

Hey. Isn’t it worth $1.35 per household to do everything we can to turn a few more Americans into elitist snobs that David Brooks can relate to?


Share

4 Responses to “Resistance is futile: NPR must be funded so we can ‘assimilate people’”

  • [...] this link: Resistance is futile: NPR must be funded so we can ‘assimilate people’ Tags: dan [...]

  • Randy Jackson:

    If you object to the culture David Brooks likes, as reflected in NPR programming, seems like to be fair you’d have to include broadcasts like the Thistle and Shamrock, which brings Celtic music to millions of Americans with Irish backgrounds. And if you suggest that Celtic music is really Irish culture, then how about Mountain Stage, the best of live Appalachian, folk and bluegrass music — uniquely American, which only NPR broadcasts?

    And I find it a bit ironic that you slam the elitists in one breath and in the next suggest that there’s plenty of variety available on XM/Sirius, a subscription service well beyond the means of tens of millions of Americans.

    Let them eat cake, right?

    … Oh, sorry about the reference there, didn’t mean to go all elitist on you,…

  • Craig:

    OK, I’m not replying to debate you on the merits of Federal funding for NPR (despite the fact that I’m a daily listener). I’m pretty much ambivalent on the issue. Instead, I have a question…but a few observations first. 1) Defunding NPR will have the same impact on the budget deficit as removing a grain of sand from the beach at Holland State Park will have on the look of that beach. 2) Your “low hanging fruit” analogy doesn’t work either. All Congress had to do to really have an impact on the budget is let the Bush tax cuts expire; that required no action at all. 3) So far the new Republican House is off to quite a start: trying to repeal the new Health Care law, restricting abortion even in the case of rape/incest, and defunding NPR. Oh, and they use the word “jobs” in more of their public pronouncements now, but I don’t think that counts as job creation legislation which was supposed to be their top priority.

    So now the question. How do you define the word “elites”? I know it’s used as a pejorative by many conservatives, but this is the first time I recall you using it. My Websters Collegiate Dictionary defines “elite” as the upper social or economic class”, but something tells me you had something else in mind. So, pray tell, define it for me.

  • Cant be patient till a subsequent publish continue the fantastic writing.

Leave a Reply

Writers